nanog mailing list archives
Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question
From: James Bensley <jwbensley () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 14:37:10 +0100
On 4 May 2018 at 07:01, Erik Sundberg <ESundberg () nitelusa com> wrote:
1. Can I enable iBGP between the PE's in a full mesh to allow traffic between the PE's without going to the core's. Or does this break the Route Reflector model?
If I have understood your design correctly then don't use next-hop-self on the RR's. Ideally you'd have out of band RRs so you don't need NHS but I can see that you're are both RRs and PEs so NHS is required. If you enabled iBGP sessions between all your PEs you have defeated the point of RRs :) I don't know your setup in detail but is there something you can do on your RRs to allow you to remove NHS? eBGP routes will have NHS by default so you just need to check the impact on iBGP routes, maybe you can remove NHS at the expense of redistributing a couple of connected routes. Cheers, James.
Current thread:
- Route Reflector Client Design Question Erik Sundberg (May 03)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Spyros Kakaroukas (May 04)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Ca By (May 04)
- RE: Route Reflector Client Design Question michalis.bersimis (May 04)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question James Bensley (May 04)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Ahad Aboss (May 04)
- RE: Route Reflector Client Design Question Erik Sundberg (May 04)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Mark Tinka (May 05)
- RE: Route Reflector Client Design Question Erik Sundberg (May 05)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Nick Hilliard (May 06)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Mark Tinka (May 06)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Aaron Gould (May 06)
- Re: Route Reflector Client Design Question Mark Tinka (May 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Route Reflector Client Design Question Jakob Heitz (jheitz) (May 04)